In his email Roberto writes: "... So far, the only mechanism I know to obtain the correect behavior is to run actual VMs for MonetDB. ..." and he is right. But that implies that the container behaviour is wrong, but that is not true.

That is not what I was implying.

I was implying that the only way is to run each MonetDB in a VM that is correctly sized for it. This is misusing a VM as a workaround for the fact that MonetDB's resource usage cannot be capped.